1. I have no qualms about opening 2N with this
distribution (e.g., Kx QJx AKQxxx Kx) [Another 18-count!
...K&R = 19.5
--Jeff] but this hand is too rich in tricks
and controls for 2N. I would open 1 and jump to 3. I do
not like opening 1 and jumping to 3N since that is too
much emphasis on just the diamond suit (e.g., Ax Kx AKQxxxx xx).

Regarding the 3 bid, I would make it playing standard
but I like to play that 1-1M, 3 is artificial showing
a strong jump shift with a) + or b) 6331 or 7330 with
shortness in a major* or c) diamonds, no stiff and controls
(this hand). Over 3, responder describes his hand with lots
of major-suit distribution and otherwise relays with 3 to
find out about openers hand. Opener rebids 3 with shortness
in a major, 3 with clubs and 3N with this hand. Over 3,
responder bids 3 to ask opener to bid 3N with shortness in
reponder's major.

* with shortness in clubs, opener rebids 2 over a 1 reponse
or 2 over a 1 reponse

MIKE

My initial reaction was 1. Upon reflection, 2NT is right
since this is matchpoints (I'm less worried about missing
a diamond slam). Followups should be pretty easy.
[I knew he'd open 2NT! --Jeff]

ROBERTO

Open 1, rebid 3N over any "likely" response. 2nd choice:
Open 2N. I hate to open 2N on offshape hands, though (one
of my pet peeves).

SYLVIA

Open 1, rebid 3.

WALTER

I ran this through your
K&R evaluator and it came up with
22.2 and 21.9 DK. It seems a little high if you are
evaluating the hand in NT. I open 2NT. [Seems OK. Maybe
a tiny bit high. Would you open 2 if the suit were spades?
I'd not, but it'd be close, so I'll evaluate at about 21.5.
Hmmm...that makes 2NT a mild underbid! --Jeff]

WEB

It looks to me like opening 1, preparing to bid 3 over
a one level response. I admit it's a slight underbid, but
I think the alternatives are worse. I expect to play in 3NT
unless partner rebids a major or shows diamond support.

JEFF AT THE TABLE

2NT

WINNING ACTION

2NT. Partner has Q98x 1087x Qx Jxx. 1...3NT
will work, too, as would Ed's approach, if partner chooses
to respond to 1. My guess is that he wouldn't; his
favorite answer to all bidding problems is "pass." He did
get us to game after 2NT.

I think Mike hit it on the nose.
I'd open 1 and rebid 3 if the game were IMPs, but at matchpoints,
I'll give up some of the chances for a diamond slam in exchange
for being sure to have my hand be declarer and maybe reaching
a thin 3NT without divulging anything before the opening lead.

Most of the field opened 1 and rebid 2NT, playing there.
The 1...3 underbids are very bad, I think, not so much because
they are big underbids (not awful at matchpoints if you don't
have anything good to do) but because if partner passes, you're
playing in a minor, almost certain to be a bad score at MPs when
notrump is playable.

Does Cole 2 solve this problem? A K/S forcing 3 rebid does, I guess.

Ed's methods are interesting, but I'm not sure I want to remember
artificial methods that will come up so rarely. If they were
similar to methods over 1-1NT; 3 and 1M-1NT; 3, then I'd be
more interested in a full set of such structures, I suppose.